Friday, February 12, 2010

I Love Rachel Maddow

Almost as much as I loathe everything the Republican Party has become. Almost.

She consistently makes calm, rational arguments against an increasingly hysterical, unhinged right (see the Tea-Baggers, who find even the Republicans too cuddly-lefty). The right brands her as someone out on the fanatical left wing fringes, but I just don't see it; there's no sensible comparison between her and, say, Glenn Beck (Keith Olbermann maybe; but not Maddow).

The fact that she goes on here for 10 minutes shows how widespread this depraved obstructionism is among these bozos.



This clip comes to me, as do most Maddow and Olbermann clips, from Ed Brayton over at Dispatches From the Culture Wars. I refuse to comb thru network news coverage to find the nuggets, but I must say I'm grateful that someone else does. This way I get all of the nutrition and none of the junk food.

13 comments:

BrianAlt said...

She does make rational statements. But I think the lesbian thing keeps too many people away. Yeah, we're still like that.

wunelle said...

It doesn't strike me to think of that, I guess. I can't help thinking that the only people who would be turned away from her as a news commentator because of her private sexuality were never really going to be in her camp in the first place.

So long as she lethally bashes Republicans she has my undying affection.

dbackdad said...

Maddow is great. Any comparison of her with Beck or O'Reilly is ridiculous. She's much too rational and logical and does not come unhinged like they do.

BrianAlt said...

Agreed, but it's a convienent excuse.

Foilwoman said...

Wunelle: I can't decide whether I have a bigger crush on Rachel Maddow for that piece, or you for bringing it to my attention. Thank you.

Andrew Murrey said...

Too bad, most of that "nugget" is full of false truths. Republicans never supported trying terror victims in civilian courts. I couldn't watch any more of the lies.

She is a liberal mouth piece. The "left" has had a filibuster proof majority for two years. Two bad they couldn't deliver campaign promise one, and keep blaming the "right" for their inability. Last time I checked the democrats didn't need ANY republican votes to pass ANYTHING.

11/2010 is coming. It's time for the big spenders to be shown the door.

wunelle said...

Ha. Well, you're free to believe whatever Faux Noise tells you. Me, I'm happy to hold the Democrats' feet to the fire for their failings--and I agree that they've done little with their strong majorities (though a majority in the Senate is useless against an obstructionist block). But it's hardly fair to hold Democrats responsible for Republican corruption and bungling and amorality. (And what happens on 11/2010? An election? And you find the "solution" to be what the Repubs gave us for the last 30 years?)

Say what you will about the Democrats, I'll take a thousand of them, flaws and all, over a single politician with the Republican disease.

wunelle said...

I might also add that without "big spending," our economy would have collapsed completely (thanks to a decade of stupefying, greed-based Republican mismanagement). Thomas Frank and others have exposed the utter lie in your threadbare assumptions about Dems vs Repubs vis-a-vis spending and the economy. In modern times, it's the Republicans who amass the deficits and Democrats who dig us out.

dbackdad said...

Speaking of mouthpieces ... (How's that tea taste, Mr. Murrey?).

Anonymous said...

she is another liar from the left. all that she cares about is demonizing the right. The left is far more out of control the right, and have never served to do anything except make things worse for all Americans!

wunelle said...

Oops! Forgot to turn the crazy filter off.

dbackdad said...

Well, that commenter hit all the qualifications for a crazy right-wing comment:

1. Posted anonymously (too chicken-shit to stand up for their opinion).

2. Ignores accepted standards of capitalization, punctuation and grammar.

3. Uses an ad hominem attack (has no actual information to back up his/her assertions).

4. Plays the patriotism card and professes to speak for "all Americans!"

wunelle said...

Yeah, I love this head-in-sand attempt to make something true by just stating it! If Maddow is not telling the truth, then give something more than a sputter and show us her errors. Indeed, I'm sure she'd be happy to be corrected--but facts would be a stronger argument than anger and faith.

But you have no facts, of course. What a way to live: lie and call everyone else liars.